can't be challenged - read ..., page-68

re: still hope for you lot! Thanks macrae12

But s.111 seems to be simply saying that Bowler may refuse an application IF IN RESPECT OF THE LAND Bowler is satisfied (like enjoying a good meal?) that CAZ's application, when considered in relationship to the public interest, the application should not be granted.

I'm still struggling (no abuse please) to discover the limits of that power to not grant an application.

Does it restrict the Minister to only consider CAZ in respect of the public interest in Shovelanna? If so, then is that public interest in Shovelanna (the land) bound up with the history of RIO having had, once upon a time, a past exploration lease over Shovelanna? And notice! Everyone keeps on admitting that RIO has no claim whatsoever, based on the Mining Act, in any respect to the Mining Act other than through, and only through SECTION one one one!

And do I have to keep repeating that? One one one! Only through one one one.

I tend to think RIO's previous and expired exploration lease has not created any public interest in Shovelanna by way of an obligation by the public to RIO.

I can not see how the public owes RIO or how any such indebtedness if there is any owed by the public to RIO, can become a component of the public interest in the land. Which is why I look forward to Bowler explaining exactly what the public interest is, and how the public interest lies more with RIO than CAZ.

Or is it simply that Bowler is his own man and Australians are so incredibly apathetic they deserve nonsensical and arbitrary government through legislation that confused and blends the judicial and executive powers supposedly meant to kept separate?

Therefore, Bowler (by my interpretation) is obliged by s.111 to find grounds why CAZ should not be granted an exploration lease. And I for one am buggered if I can figure out any reason to not grant CAZ the exploration lease.

CAZ is a wonderful and sweet darling company. Innocent to the core, pure of heart, and earnest in its youthful and passionate desire to expedite the exploration and consequential development of Shovelanna in the public interest of all Westralians and by doing so contribute to the strengthening of the whole of the Commonwealth of Australia so that together, we can make our great country more wealthy and strong in order to ensure our survival in an increasingly turbulent world.

To make hay while the sun shines over W.A. And to be the best of corporate citizen. And just maybe, in the future, contribute more cash donations to the Labour party of W.A. than in their wildest dreams they could have expected from RIO.

On that note, I call on Bowler to think again if what he has done, and if he can undo it….the end.
===============================

macrae12 SAID

Post #1025101 - in reply to msg. #1025088 - splitview

Millways, the Minister will have cited many Public Service Acts in his decision. s111 would only be a framework. Legals precedents, technical guidelines, minutes, AGS briefs, regulations, etc - it just goes on an on.

However, regarding public interest: Firstly, the Minister considered process, public opinion, specific interests, common interests, and shared values. Lastly the second stage would have been to explicitly consider the balancing of interests of individuals as consumers/citizens, enterprise or business interests, and collective interests in explaining the reasons for decision.